The world appears to our consciousness as a multiplicity of phenomena, which we generally distinguish in a rough way as things, occurrences and relations. Our total picture of the world combines all these as its single items, as singularities, as partial structure.

A science of the world is separated into as many individual sciences as there can be separated viewpoints of the total world picture, or as many as anyone can pick a plan out of a partial picture of the world.

Now, knowledge [1] as such is likewise a part of the world, a phenomenon among phenomena, a partial function within the overall workings of the total world system. From the viewpoint of the world, consciousness is a part of the relationships between reality and our brain system.

The separation of knowledge as a particular appearance of the world raises the burning question of a science, of what knowledge the study of knowledge itself requires. Thus is developed the challenge of a science of knowledge. What is knowledge? What can we know, what must be known about knowledge to justify the world? The question thus is nothing less than self-knowing, determination of the nature of self, and also of self-realization and self-understanding of knowledge. Is this possible? Is it possible, can the systemization of knowledge itself be accomplished? How can a Science of Knowledge be produced?

With this questions we have raised the problem of Scientology or Eidology.

Scientology or Eidology, as the science of knowledge itself, places itself in contrast to those sciences of things, which pass into knowledge. Realizing the precise nature of the problem of knowledge, let us proceed to the facts of the case.

Scientology thus selects knowledge for its subject. On the other hand knowledge does NOT cease to be a part, a particular condition of the world as it exists, belonging to the body-spirit level of the world. Because of the nature of the problem of knowledge, a dual positioning of Knowledge is required.

Knowledge as such is established in its contrast to the world (as we shall see later) as agent, producer, creator of the world, and thus in its active role.

Knowledge, on the other hand, does not cease to be a part, a partial relation of the world. By this it subjects itself to its own activity, selects for itself a passive role, and makes itself a fact, a product, a creation of itself.

The price of comprehending consciousness in its entirety is therefore the obligation of giving these two positions of knowledge their rights and full appreciation. From this, Scientology is classified right at the beginning into sciences of

Consciousness in its active role: pure Scientology,

Consciousness in its passive role: applied Scientology.

The total system of Scientology is capable of arising primarily out of the cooperation of these two positions, out of the simultaneously active and passive spontaneity of consciousness. Consciousness of reality enters Scientology only through the other side, the appearance-side of the world-factor consciousness, and not as a part and accessory of the world. At this point, applied Scientology breaks into the essential domain of phenomenology, into the world of appearances, while retaining for itself the originality of its own contemplation. However looked upon, Scientology remains the Science of Consciousness.

We arrive at this schematic:

Recognition, perception, self-knowledge of the world thus demands tracing back to the two independent positions of consciousness, as the active side and of world, as the passive side. Only on this dual basis the work of knowledge about the world can raise itself. Otherwise all attempts towards a unism, like

knowledge is nothing but world, a rise of knowledge in the world,world is nothing but knowledge, a rise of world in knowledge,

merely remains an arbitrariness. Only out of the equally valued cooperation of knowledge as creator; and world as creation, true science of the world can arise.

Consciousness as mediator to the world and the world as that which is mediated, are mutual supplements, complements. With every part of either, the other is simultaneously established and understood. Consciousness as producer presupposes world, world as a product presupposes consciousness. Based on this state of affairs Scientology takes the right of to treat and also presuppose the world as counterpart, as an appendage of consciousness, which means going back to the worldly given conditions as if they were self-explanatory. Because without this worldly appendages, all knowledge would remain wholly empty and pointless. The completion and reciprocal condition of consciousness and world is based on the construction of the world and is therefore inevitable. Therefore a reciprocal assumption of the results of Scientology and Cosmology is also justified and unobjectionable. One can treat the related parts of an integral whole, AS IF if they would exist each by itself. But this can never be more than an artificial step of the proceedings, simply an operational method. The real and exciting mutual dependency of the two regions will in no manner be influenced or abolished through use of this method.

Once we take this baseline about the relation of knowledge and world, we arrive from the first at a decisive result. If the world is a creation of the consciousness, then we will naturally come across the trace of the creating activity of consciousness in the world. Experience and observation will let us hit the results in the form of knowledge, conception, comprehension. Now it would be a rushness if we would conclude, from the fact, that they themselves could be taken out of the world, that comprehension and conception also have their last and essential origin in the world itself. The possibility remains always open that consciousness and reason themselves have first brought such knowledge and comprehension into the world. But it still has to be examined, and to what extent, if consciousness and reason really are the originators of the worldly system of concepts.

The task of Scientology or Eidology is the erection of the systems of knowledge, of understanding, of comprehension per se. Reason (here we have to infringe into Psychology & Logic) is consciousness in concepts of systematized comprehension. Comprehension is systematized knowing, knowingness within a system. A science of knowledge, by its own uniqueness, lifts itself out of the circle of all other sciences.

Scientology as a science of knowledge, or as a system of knowledge, predicates self-comprehension, self-review, self-systematization, self-grasping, self-recognition of knowledge and of comprehension.

Knowledge is the common material of all other sciences. It follows therefore that the science of knowledge itself is the key-science of the overall system of the sciences of the world. All other sciences of the world have the science of knowledge as their presuppositions, by virtue of the original dependency of all world-hood upon knowing. Without the complement taken through Scientology, all direct sciences of the world, all sciences not connected through this interaction of Scientology would remain one-sided, uncompleted and prejudiced, whether abstract or concrete sciences. Every supposed autarchy or autonomy, any singular science of the world, can be nothing better than an uncritical encroachment or a self-deception.

Unaware thinking has always simply seen THE given fact in the world. We ourselves, our knowing and comprehension may be only ingredients of the world. The task of any science cannot be any other than exploring this world more and more correctly and exactly in all its details. The wishful goal of such a world conception is an endless breakdown of the world and all reality into complexities of physical, astronomical, geological, chemical, biologic, personality and sociologic processes. Schopenhauer rightly speaks against such "dogmatists who assume that if they only go straight forward long enough they would arrive at the end of the world". Because, what is really going on: an attempt to escape from the unknown into even more unknowns. A closer consideration has to raise doubt if this equation "world equals beingness" is even right, or if our consciousness is not jointly responsible for something of this world-beingness. The question if consciousness has parts in the world cannot be dismissed out of hand without further investigation. Again, if this portion of consciousness is not reliably connected or disconnected from the building of world, then obviously every science of the world jumping over this primary question, would make itself surreptitiously guilty in their assumptions. The original dispute between knowledge and world has to be cleared up. The problem of Kant, the participation or non-participation of our consciousness, of our mind and our reason in the construction of the world stands at the portal of all comprehension and all science.

Consciousness, Conscious-Beingness, World-Beingness

If we take consciousness as an independent factor out of the world, and assign to consciousness an individual role regarding the world, we get an opposition of consciousness and world.

Consciousness, which always remains a part and particular creation of the world, is, because of this very worldliness, incompetent to create from a nothingness. In order for consciousness to be able to create, it has to first find a source out of which it can create, a somethingness a beingness. The creation won by consciousness out of that beingness, being captured by consciousness, transforms into Being-In-Consciousness, into Certainty of Beingness, into conscious-beingness. Consciousness and conscious- beingness supplement themselves in regard to the world. In each one of the two the world is immanent, but world in another relation, in another role. Consciousness in its creator-role brings about the world. Conscious-beingness is brings about the world as a creature.

Consciousness as creator and conscious-beingness as a creation unite into world-beingness.

World-beingness is Beingness under the law of consciousness; the world is an accessory, a complement to consciousness. Only that what is knowable goes forth into the world itself. Beingness has only has its place in the world in form of conscious-beingness .

Scientology, Phenomenology, Cosmology

The systematic positioning of Knowledge and world, as it has just been described, delivers the fundament for all systematizing of science. It responds as follows: First, to the consciousness as science, the Scientology or Eidology; Second to the conscious-beingness as science, the Phenomenology; Third, to the world-beingness per se as science, cosmology.

Phenomenology is the science of the Beingness in Knowledge, of the Being as it is known or seen, as it appears in Knowledge. On the other hand, Cosmology grasps the world as the product of Knowledge or Consciousness, thus extending itself both to the side of Knowledge and to the side of Beingness.

With the help of the position which has been assigned to consciousness, Scientology comes forth as the key science for all of Phenomenology and Cosmology.